Do you ever doubt your worldview? I saw people on Reddit saying things like "I'm surprised he conceded", and if something that mundane surprises people, that seems to me a symptom that their perspective is quite disconnected from reality.
Why are you surprised people are surprised Orban conceded? After Trump and Bolsonaro its safe to say that far right government and conceding defeat don't exactly go hand in hand. It shouldn't be surprising, but given how far the far right has mutated it has become surprising. But that's on the far right. Once they become trustworthy as a political stream it might be different, but that's a long way off.
I mean to suggest maybe not hallucinating all of that stuff. Your list of "far right" politicians is exclusively made of democratically elected people who worked within the existing systems doing largely the same as others (just without sucking up to you and your pet causes). You don't mention actual far right figures at all.
The criteria you have supplied there provide no meaningful contradiction to the claim that they are far right. After all, by your criteria there, Adolf Hitler was not far right on the same grounds that he was democratically elected, used the existing systems, and did plenty of things similar to other leaders of his era.
You're probably the one operating from the faulty starting point. Those politicians just aren't your typical wholesome conservatives as they always were. They themselves don't even try to argue this point, and even view such normal conservatives as enemies to be opposed. Compare Orban to Mertz or Wilders with Rutte and they will not agree with you.
Have any of those people done an Enabling Act? Let's be reasonable here.
I don't know the precise mechanisms of your government, but you're describing a primary election here. Yes, politicians of similar persuasions can be very against each other. Giving someone a label of political extremism should have a basis in their positions or actions, not in who likes them.
You're talking about someone who was just democratically voted out.
I'm pretty sure Hitler was far right before doing that.
Both Trump and Bolsonaro have taken powers conventionally and legally afforded to the legislature or devolved authorities-- budgetary, military, electoral, legal-- and unilaterally acted on them from the executive. That was the very essence of the Enabling Act.
In a system that had been heavily rigged in his favour. He took less than half the votes in 2014 and 2018, yet took 2/3 of seats. He allocated state funds to his party. He placed party loyalists in 80% of state media.
Failing to stop democracy doesn't mean not having tried. It just signals the scale or Orban's defeat that he tailor made the elctoral system to his benefit and still lost. Or is this the point where you argue Orban having gerrymandered the country to hell and back being an honest mistake, and it making his electoral position almost unable to topple just the most curious coincidence? And all those cronies he installed in the media? Is that just a funny coincidence too?
Wilders doesn't speak of other parties as electoral rivals, but as ideologicall forces needing to be stopped. Same with how that filth Vance and Musk consider the right wing Mertz. You try to keep claiming far right politicians are normal conservatives when they themselves fiercely reject having such similarities.
The steady erosion of legislative responsibility into newfound powers for the President has been a topic of US public discourse for more than a few decades. It would not be unreasonable to call all Presidents in recent memory Hitlerites, but that is also not a very common view outside certain circles. Another complication with this comparison is that the Enabling Act was actually passed through a legislative body, somewhat unlike the usual case in the United States of ever more expansive interpretations of the powers delegated to the Executive Branch by previous statutes going unchallenged by Congress (or in a few cases being affirmed by the Supreme Court).
To be clear, i don't think overarching executive power is definitively right-wing, but rather a hallmark of modern authoritarianism of any stripe. Its just that the heavy majority of authoritarians are on the right.
The modern far right people operate in a different era, in countries with stronger constitutional systems, more entrenched democratic ideals, within stronger international systems. They couldn't switch off democracy as easily as Hitler did, and therefore that comparison is for the most part absurd and pointless.
I do find it funny how people are looking around for a copy of the Enabling Act as the only sign that a democracy failed. Like, it's been 90 years, did you not think anyone has thought about that moment and put up a bunch of guard rails to stop it from happening again? Do you think the pro=Enablers did not see these movements and try to counteract them? The Nazis could not do the Enabling Act today.... because everyone knows the consequences. You have to do it piecemeal to trick people into giving up their democracy
www.theguardian.com
Indeed. John C. Calhoun railed against the authoritarianism of the abolitionists, for example.
They indeed operate in a different era, in countries with constitutional systems more resilient to change of any kind, more entrenched ruling classes, within captured international systems. They cannot switch off democracy as easily as Hitler did because there is no democracy to switch off.
Sure, but let's also be realistic about how much work there is to do.
What the fuck do any of those posts have to do with covering coughs and sneezes? You don't need a mask to cover a cough or a sneeze, people did it all the time before covid without masks and they are doing it after covid without masks.
Doing common sense things is not letting covid run wild.
